Hey, could someone with WinAmp let me know if you are correctly hearing the last 15 seconds or so of the clip, which is the part where the pilot stumbles through his hand-off readback and is corrected by the controller, but still demands the number and ID?

The clip plays fine when I listened to it before uploading it, but now in WinAmp the clips skips over the last 15 seconds to the end.

I suspect this may be due to having SQRSoft's Crossfader plug-in installed on my version of WinAmp, but I want to make sure the clip isn't corrupted. The clip plays fine in Windows Media Player, FWIW.

Hey, could someone with WinAmp let me know if you are correctly hearing the last 15 seconds or so of the clip, which is the part where the pilot stumbles through his hand-off readback and is corrected by the controller, but still demands the number and ID?

The clip plays fine when I listened to it before uploading it, but now in WinAmp the clips skips over the last 15 seconds to the end.

I suspect this may be due to having SQRSoft's Crossfader plug-in installed on my version of WinAmp, but I want to make sure the clip isn't corrupted. The clip plays fine in Windows Media Player, FWIW.

I agree that the pilot was being a jerk. Unfortunately, I think the controller should have given him the number. I think the controller was well within bounds in telling the pilot when enough was enough, and I'd expect management to have supported him. (After all, it's not the FAA.) Stonewalling the pilot about the number is probably contrary to agency policy though....

In this case, I don't at all think the controller was stonewalling the pilot about the number. If I'm busy controlling traffic, I'm not about to take my mind off controlling to issue phone numbers to pissed off aircraft, and I'm certainly not going to get distracted by engaging the pilot in an argument about what happend (which probably would have followed if the controller had issued the number).

It's not as if the controller thought that by ignoring the pilot he could avoid the situation completely. Every controller knows that there are multiple ways of checking which controller was working which position for every second of the day, and that all the ACC phone numbers are publicly avaliable from any number of places.

Yes, if the controller had a couple of minutes to spare, and wasn't that busy, he should have gave the pilot the number, but if I'm busy, that's going to be the last thing on my mind, and the last item on a long list of priorities.

I still can't understand what the pilot was so upset about. This is AIR TRAFFIC. There are going to be restrictions. ACA460 is YYZ-YOW, so there is going to be a lot of traffic between the two and there's no sense complaining.

KSYR-pjr, wonder if you can also add the following into the [nice] clip you have produced [for me]..

in the archive, CZYZ-Apr-25-06-1730.mp3 (Toronto Center)

at 5:01 into the clip, I guess (and remembered) AC460 asked the enroute controller for the number and the ID for the previous controller. (2 seconds)

at 07:58 into the clip, the enroute controller gave out the Number and advice AC460 that "the supervisor was aware of the identity of the controller who worked you" and a few chats about this from another pilot.

The chat actually was longer when I hear it live on my scanner but was unfourtunly blocked by a open mic an other channel here in the archive..

It's not as if the controller thought that by ignoring the pilot he could avoid the situation completely.

I agree. And now, the tape will be listened to anyway. The reality is though, that if he had time, at any point, (and we don't know how much time he actually had--dealing with that pilot certainly used up some of it), to give the number and didn't, now *he* has given the appearance of being the uncooperative one, as opposed to the pilot who should have quit chipping at him after the first negative response to his request.

As I said earlier, I thought management should have been supportive of his "enough" reply. (Actually, a simple "UNABLE" would probably have been a better choice of phraseology.)

I think it will take some *very* supportive management to agree wholheartedly that ignoring the guy was the best decision. Do you think they'll be that supportive?

To identify controllers at a facility, controllers are supposed to give their initials upon request. If the controller thought he was right, the tapes would have proved him right, and he shouldn't have refused to give the ID. (He could let the pilot look up the phone number however -- that's publicly available.)

So his excuse "I don't have time" is factitious. He could have given his initials in the time it took to say "don't have time."

(And the prior comment that his comment "enough" should have been "unable" was right on.)

Give the controller a break he is working very busy departure freq. where there are lots of clearances to be issued in a short period of time. The pilot can call his ops when he gets to destination and file the incident on the flight report if he feels that his ego wasn't stroked just right. I would hate to have to sit next to a jackass like that. I'm sure it was a very long ride for the F/O to have to listen to this guy the rest of the day. Also sounds like he should be paying more attention to his ATC clearance than worrying about pulling tapes and getting Id's. Guy can't even read back the proper heading. There is a time and place for discussion like that. On 128.8 is not the time or doing 7 miles/minute in high density airspace is not the place. This guy needs to pull his head out of his ass.